Untitled

Hokitika Guardian, 5 October 1932, Page 4

The unemployment fund administration, also forms a matter for further criticism, a warning being given concerning certain. aspects of expenditure that there is a grave dr’iger to which it was felt that attention should he drawn, -that is, the inauguration of capital works which are not required and will entail a heavy annual maintenance charge. In the. endeavour to avoid the employment of men on uneconomic and useless ,work, there is a risk that large and ambitious schemes, such as reading, irrigation, iund others, much in advance of the requirements of the community, may be put in hand without sufficient coil* side ration being given to the ultimate liability which must be borne by the general taxpayer for 'and renewal 1 of works. . . The small farm scheme recently inaugurated apparently involves the expenditure of loan money, and violates the principle that borrowing for the relief of unemployment is unsound. We would also mention that there appears to he a degree of overlapping and uncertainty in regard to the collection of the unemployment levy and wages tax. We hold 'the view that taxation of this nature should be controlled hv the iComnmsianer of Taxes, by whom the machinery for collection should be devised, and in whom should be vested the authority to give rulings in connection with the involved subject of unemployment taxation. At the present time there docs not appear to he 'that degree of uniformity of practice between the Tax Department, the Unemployed Board, and the Post Office. which is essential to the smooth administration of the Act.